As mentioned in a previous post, between the months of January and September 2008 I was hired to be a Database Cop for the Caisse de Défauts (Master Sabia coined this phrase in a TVA interview btw, not me!) and clean up a department where developers were giving the impression of being cowboys with some pretty mission-critical financial data. Here are the notes from the first meeting last week at the Workplace Relations Commission (CRT: Commission des relations du travail, located in Montreal, 35 Port-Royal East, 2nd Floor).

Why I am doing this? Public Interest and to its right to know what the infamous Commission Parliamentaire hid from QuebeckersI believe some significant personal sacrifice is necessary to maintain Canadian Unity whilst I attempt to impartially describe this horrible situation our Pension Fund manager has been putting me through over the past fiveteen months (their victims are many, even some friends have mentioned psychological harassment until suicide after working there), but first, the disclaimer. Most

importantly this post is a warning to Database Administrators in general who have been in hostile environments, this is the nightmare that we have to walk into frequently enough when only Developers have controlled an environment (Brad McGehee discusses this partially in his DBA Manifesto), or if there is only one 'token' subordinated/muzzeled DBA in-house to maintain compliance with legislation.

First image: Interview dates, time, place from an e-mail I sent to the Working Standard Commission complaint validators in April 2009, about five months after I submitted the original complaint to them on December 8th, 2008. The complaint made via this government body responsible for Workplace standards was initially rejected by the Caisse, but eventually led to a mediation date five months later in July 2009 that was cancelled at the last minute by their lawyers flip-flopping on whether I was subject to conditions as a permanent employee, which means complying with the Labour Standards Act, or if I was only a lowly consultant that they can treat with disrespect repetitively (as if harassment by workplace bullies is okay?). I even wrote to their new CEO, Michael Sabia, with a personal hand delivered note in protest for their bureaucratic juggernaught response of pulling out of scheduled mediation with the Working Standards Commission, but as usual, there was no response. It is clear to me now after this long that my rights to them are not important, so I shall make this publically clear in writing. Je vais mettre ces 'maîtres' à genoux avec ma plume s'ils vont pas faire valoir mes droits !

Now for a bit of Background - What is this organisation?The Caisse de Dépôt et Placement du Québec - short name in English, although seldom used, is CDP Capital, and the long name Quebec Deposit and Investment Fund. This forty-three year old Quebec-based über-bank is the largest institutionalised fund manager within Canada and is entrusted with our pension monies as well as investing in businesses that create provincial wealth. As you can read from the Wikipedia link, they lost about 26% of our collective wealth during the 2008 fiscal year. This is a collossal amount of retirement investment to lose. Nobody ended up charged, but the executive board was litterally cleaned out in April 2009 after two consecutive 'interim' leadership failures, and the extent of mis-management was revealed (see Diane Francis' Train Wreck articles) - only a few members of the executive board were left including Operations Director Ghislain Parent. Did the SQ even look into where these bandits à cravates placed all their unwarranted bonuses, they were giving themselves even in 2008 for leaving while the 'perfect storm' was happening!? Sabia, the new head of this institution, has recently restructured the activities completely and abolished about 55 positions - must have been because the ship had lost its way a little don't you think? I still maintain my opinion that the Gomery Commission regarding the Federal Sponsorship Scandal, which saw us wasting years of taxpayer time and money over a couple of million dollars lost is the greatest hypocrisy in modern Canadian history because the Caisse lost almost five thousand times this amount, whilst the provincial media has only spent a few months on this subject in comparison. Moving on...

Second Image - the Job Offer itself. I met with the Senior Vice President of the department January 18th, 2008. Priorities were to deal with optimisation, backups, and alleviating production support from my former DBA colleague. The VP clearly indicated that this was for a permanent position, and I agreed that if I made it past the first six months, we'd switch over officially. I have e-mails to confirm this agreement, and e-mails are contractual according to educaloi.qc.ca. I even had a confirmation meeting with the internal Human Resources Department representative (and actually a neighbour) in March, 2008, to ensure their intentions.

Please note that what public details you see here are correspondent with discussions at the CRT – I have no intention of tarnishing the Judge’s decision making process. However, still outraged as I am at this continued denial of my rights, I wish to seek public aid in pressuring the organisation, which holds over two hundred billion dollars of our provincial investment in its hands (including Real Estate Assets), to remediate this situation immediately. This is a David Vs Goliath situation, and is evident by the fact that four lawyers showed up to in defense of the latter! And to help readers to understand the extent of denial I have witnessed during this whole complaint process, even Legal Counsel at the Caisse de Dépôt itself (Mélanie Julien), told the Working Standards Commission's validator that the man above, whose Business Card clearly states he is a Senior VP, was not a Vice President in the first place. Sort of like her attitude during our November 2008 meeting, stating to me that I have bascially no rights, not even Human Rights, since I was on contract still and they can cut the cord whenever they felt like it, no matter what the circumstance (Audit failure, racial comments, firing the whistleblower, asked to bring the department back into control etc).

Just another anecdote of twisting the truth - pointing out that only I waited till the last minute to file a complaint: one thing my opposition in the public hearing, just last week, forgot to mention was that I tried to make an internal complaint to the CDPQ within the 90 day limit for filing with the Commission des normes du travail (Working Standards Commission) after the forced departure on September 9th, 2008 and even had a meeting on November 12th, 2008 with the Complaints Director herself and a junior lawyer. The end result was no action whatsoever on their part (what Daniel Laprès describes as Quebec's Laïcité stricte?). All I got while leaving the meeting was a verbal sorry, but a warning that the corporation will do all it can to protect itself - nice job, victim intimidation (!), en plus. I know I mentioned bureaucratic warfare before - and I thoroughly believe now after living through this debacle, that this white collar crime has contributed to hundreds of thousands of native English speaking Quebeckers to leave the province since the beginning of the 1970s (known as the Anglo Exodus). This trend has only reversed within the past years with the return/influx of many Anglo-Quebeckers, in addition to the question of sovereignty returning to a hypothetical situation (after two referendums defeated) and due to a clear lack of legitmacy for such a retrograde cause.

I was warned beforehand that It's the Caisse - Discrimination is acceptable there when against Anglos.

I was told by a senior consultant friend before starting there that within six to eight months senior managers would find a way to force me out, as is done on a regular basis to Anglophones who work there – even confirmed to me by several security guards who work for the organisation (that wish to remain anonymous!) that it is practically modus operandi at the Caisse to do so. This is a clear violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and my Human Rights - hence my Quebec Human Rights Commission Complaint File # C1694-09. Les allégations contenues dans la plainte ont été considérées suffisantes pour que la Commission y donne suite à la poursuite d'une demande d'enquête (qui sera refusé, je prédis, tel que celui de la Commission des normes du travail en août/septembre 2009).I still cannot believe this is happening in my own country – it is shameful that the Quebec Government does little to stop this itself (by not enforcing any sort of minority quotas, or playing a grinch-like denial game) and is often abetted by typical Canadian complacency, which exists not only in QC, or an assumption that to treat English speaking Quebeckers this way is acceptable. One could describe this as reverse discrimination at the provincial level, against what French speaking Canadians receive in the rest of Canada. Discrimination seems to be (proof in many posts already on this subject) okay in my own province and as a victim of it, I shall fight to the death so that my rights are recognised, whether the provincial majority (in denial) likes it or not. It is a scenario that repeats itself over and over again anywhere on the planet, and not doing anything about it only makes it worse for all minorities in Quebec. On the other hand, it is unfortunate that the Globe and Mail concerns itself with being anti-Quebec - to sell more newspapers perhaps, by not clarifying the fact that Miss Naema Ahmed was asking for unreasonable conditions with respect to men in her classroom (Julius Grey, the famous Human Rights Lawyer, has taken QC's side on this one with good reason) is sloppy. I applaud Patrick Lagacé for his réplique counter to the Mop and Pail's misunderstanding of the situation in Quebec completely.

But, hey, don`t listen to me with respect to the English speaking provincial minority, just listen to TVA.Canoe.com's analysts point out that Sabia is an Anglophone from Ontario (although his Grandfather arrived in QC originally with pennies) and the fact that it created a huge contraversy in the QC FR-speaking media provides clear proof to the underlying message that 'He's not one of us' - and thus, should not be on the list for the Caisse's top job (remember your detestable knee-jerk reaction André Pratte?). He even complaints about Sabia's level of French, and note that Jean-Philippe Décarie propagates and idea from the 60s that Anglophones who work in Montreal (ne faîtes pas l'effort) do not want/or make the effort to learn French, nor know it well - this is nothing more than prejudice since a qualified majority of Anglophones speak la langue de Molière (10 years ago when I arrived from Brussels, a cosmopolitian/trilingual city in itself, it was around 80%) around Montreal speak and work in French. But due to this prejudice we are literally shut-out of the provincial government job opportunities, whether they are for the Federal or Provincial level here. What bothers me personally, is that during out first hearing the oppositions' principal Lawyer Maître l'H[mister unhappy] stated to the Commissaire (Judge) with a 'oh, not another' tone that this case was about `discrimination parce ce qu'il est Anglophone'. If this lawyer, who entitles himself to take advantage of a provincial minority and downplay the discrimination we live by means of the our local government (which we pay taxes too, just like everyone else buddy!), he's already tripping over himself. Had such a thing be said in the United States about a minority during a public hearing it would make Front Page news. Here, as I stated above, it is considered normal. I hope the Judge recognises this and puts a stop to it on my behalf of all Anglophones, and all minorities for that matter, in the province.

On being labelled an Anglophone - Je déteste cette `labelling' employé au Québec - Je SUIS BILINGUE, je suis allé à L'école bilingue durant mon enfance à Vancouver. I'm part of both founding nations of this state, à quand la fin de cette chanson 'which side are you on boy' (Pete Seeger) - I want to be ABOVE this shite, as our Border Reivers (Anglo/Scotch Clans) ancestors where for centuries, on the Graham side, of the family http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_Reivers - you would not be surprised to know that Pierre ELLIOT Trudeau was also descended from these Clans, thus his success as one our greatest Prime Ministers relies partially on the experience of being between two nations, and the experience handed down for generations of living on the borders of both Scotland and England. I explained this to Justin [Trudeau], but I do not believe he got/gets it [yet].

It would seem that the Quebec Government and Media are completely oblivious to the fact that Racism has its costs – the victim pays dearly. It is now fifteen months later and I have only just managed to recover my company’s finances (and during a recession too, imagine) while I went through another round of psychological harassment and defamation by the one sovereigntist bully developer controlling production in the office at my next mandate (bad news comes in threes?). The issue here is not that so many Quebeckers hold these views against the English-Speaking minority, it is simply that the one Blueneck in a group of ten QC Francophones will go out of their way behind the scenes to make someone's life miserable, while profiting from the complacency/passivism of the group.

Image Three: the call to testify last week. The recruiter is involved in this case and it is unfortunate, because they were perfectly professional during these whole events and I would still recommend them to anyone, despite the filibustering has-been lawyer they have on board. This image below provides the case number also (CM-2009-4697).

Where does this go from here?

Next public testimonies are scheduled for May 10th, 12th and June 11th, 2010 to establish that I was indeed under the conditions of an employee and not a consultant at the Caisse de Défauts. This means months of waiting again in this bureaucratic nightmare, but it is absolutely necessary - asking my company to get involved means I need representation, and prior to this step in the direction of the CDP, Intellabase was profitable for seven years. I find this completely ironic also that an organisation that is founded upon the principle of contributing to the economic development of Quebec (but from my experience they are in part responsible for Quebec's blight) is responsible for trying to destroy my business. My goal is to clearly point out how their goal is to only keep the majority in control of resources and prevent the advancement of minorities – and is clearly Racist as typical of any overly passionate and Nationalistic government organisations can become without being reminded of their folly - I would even go as far to describe their mindset as inebriated from illusion tranquille. There is much jurisprudence with respect to cases like this (clear jurisprudence for employee conditions i.e. subordination, equipment, fixed hours), so I shall be very ready with my legal councel by the time we are in the next public hearing. Only next fall, we will get into the details of the psychological harassment itself in court, if a settlement is not reached in the meantime.

It was somewhat amusing to watch lawyers wandering in and out of the room – obviously they keep trying to negotiate a settlement, but the Caisse de Défauts is not known for eating much humble pie, as experienced journalist Konrad Yakabuski noticed while covering this organisation. Thankfully new CEO Michael Sabia has played the role Charest was expecting him to do and clean out the organisation at the top (as Accountant CEOs do, and as he did at Via Rail and Bell in the past), and new Finance Minister Raymond Bachand has confirmed that Risk is managed appropriately now. Regarding the department I was serving, it has been swept under the control of the I.T. department after my departure and the Senior Consultant who forced me out was also eventually dismissed - so, yes, there is good Karma and some retribution already. And I was rather happy to thanks to the great editors at Simple-Talk.com, based in Silicon Fen, to have published the Disaster Recovery Plan (aussi en français) a generic version of what I did for the Caisse itself while there: viewership has reached over twelve thousand for this open-source DRP.

History of Government Dishonesty Repeats Itself

It is interesting to note that on Tuesday February 9th, 2010 the cases listed for public audience were incorrectly named, as if to conceal that someone was pursuing the Caisse? What bothers me the most is that journalists who regularly take aim at the CDPQ in French (mainly from La Presse), or English (Montreal Gazette, National Post and Globe and Mail) have not shown up to the public hearings, despite multiple reminders I have sent. I really don't understand this crazy complacent ear-plugging occurring, but hey call me crazy, I am suing through two government bodies (not at the same time, their is procedure, double-recourse simultaneously is not possible), the largest institutionalised pension manager in the land. They perhaps cannot believe it happened or is happening, thus publishing myself. This must not happen anymore to Quebec's minorities and I will expose as much of the truth as is revealed in the public hearings (The Caisse manages all of our Pension Money, they must be held accountable), as opposed to how my forebearer did: Major-General Frederick Barton Maurice, who took on publically, via letters to the [London] Times and Daily Chronicle, U.K. Prime-Minister Lloyd George in 1918 for exaggerating troop numbers in Parliament concerning General Haig's fighting strength on the Western Front. This is known in British History as the Maurice Affair/Maurice Papers. The scandal provokes a no-confidence vote in Westminster, which Lloyd George had to litterally threaten and buy his way out of losing his post as First Lord. It was noted, after studying situations my ancestors were placed under, that taking on the government itself should not be done without another government faction involved, or better yet, two of them. See, I'm a typical DBA, I always have a backup :)

Fear Plays A Big Factor in Quebec

Many persons, of diverse backgrounds, during this same time period in 2008, have suffered from this type of harassment (details to come later publically and during the next meeting in May), but they gave up right away due to the size of this institution - even though several have remained unemployed ever since (15 months). Since I have witnessed too much to stand by and do nothing about this ethnic cleansing - defined as 'the planned deliberate removal from a specific territory (govt workplace in this case), persons of a particular ethnic group, by force or intimidation, in order to render that area ethnically homogeneous,' and there is significant legal backing, I shall litterally drop the gloves on the CDPQ until they cede - following a hold-fast/siege strategy until justice is obtained. And for those who think that I am just attacking Quebec because the bashing has been a little too frequent lately, I am simply following a family tradition on the other side of the family at questioning government over its tendency to tyranny. Doctor John, as affectionately called by seniors in the Shebbeare family, was highly critical of Colonial Magistrates and wrote out during the American Revolution in the same way. He was also extremely critical of His Majesty King George III (the mad one), but ended up as a pamphleteer for the same King he was attacking, around the time an another ancestor became Prime Minister.

Parting words for this hopefully enlightening post:I love my job as a DBA, and nobody is going to break multiple laws in front of me without a fight, no matter how many years it takes, no matter how much I have to write and testify – when you know you’ve got at least four, and arguably six technical reasons behind a fight, then it is rather motivating to know beforehand that you can be very consitently cogent in the future. I have prepared all these related posts over the past year, of which many of them were SQL Server Central front-pagers (if you read between the lines, the extent of what I witnessed made it very, very easy to thoroughly document) - here they are again if you missed them beforehand:

This is just another part of the series, next one will follow once the jurisprudence is settled for the conditions that place my case under the protection of the Labour Standards Act. Thank you very much for reading.

P.S. The details of this case have been documented by a trained historian, and now I can sincerely thank all the professors at VesaliusCollege, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, for the thousands of pages we had to write during the International Affairs and History degree between 1994-98.

P.P.S. BTW for those of you who just watched the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Opening Ceremonies, and heard complaints about the lack of French, please understand that Vancouver is FIVE AND HALF hours by plane from Quebec, and there are very few bilinguals to learn the beautiful language with, as I noticed while growing up. From reading up in La Presse recently (at least pointing out that our first Canadian Olympic Gold won at home was by the Great Alexandre Bilodeau) it seems as if the journalists were hoping for bilingual levels the equivalent of Ottawa, on the border of the province: they seem to have a complete lack of the importance of geography regarding this issue. Whatever the case, the QC media can try and rain on Vancouver's great Olympics all it wants, they have New Yorker's approval and that is far more impartial. _______

Comments

Posted by Hugo Shebbeare on 5 March 2010

What I find amusing, is that this post has been up for several weeks now and there is not a peep from the CDPQ. No letter of a cease and desist, no warning whatsoever (after all this is a public case), so why should they. They will simply play the denial game for as long as possible until everything is settled in front of a judge.

Shortly after my time was cut short at the CDPQ, unwanted obviously, I had a conversation with a senior guy in our department who made a comment to me upon leaving. As you can see by this e-mail, his attitude is to simply do nothing, and that I am too noble for the CDPQ (meaning that it is run by those without principle?). You be the judge:

Sorry man, but wtf? How do you expect me not to react to your comment upon leaving - Don't be too Noble!

Very ironic, but I shall not shake off all this blood, sorry, been many centuries that way. Let me put it into perspective for you, these are my direct forbearers:

<abridged, long list of recipients of awards like the Victoria Cross, men who participated in two Everest Expeditions, Military Generals, several Cambridge Prof.s, a Prime Minister, current Uncle running all of HRH Prince Charle’s Charities, basically a dynastic order of Knights..> (i.e. meaning, that I am not acting out of Character with them.)

You guys have to take [X-problem] seriously at the Caisse, and I know that [Director of Governance] is doing all she can to fix that, but those in denial at the top of PA have lost integrity with la Direction.

Getting rid of me is not the solution to [X] problem. I was warned about the Caisse before joining that 'they don't listen'

- why don't you have the courage to take a step and fix that internally, if it is such an obvious problem.

Have a good weekend and talk to you soon.

Hugo

Posted by didimiesen on 6 March 2010

Bravo, bravo Hugh for your honesty and courage! Yes, it takes incredible courage to OUT the TRUTH in la belle province. The never ending warnings & intimidations - to 'keep your mouth shut' - & 'accusations' of being anti-Francophone etc... have been a way of life for Anglos & immigrants in Quebec, for decades!! Stay strong, my friend and know "The Truth always comes back to bite one in the ass."

Posted by Hugo Shebbeare on 9 March 2010

-- Thank you Didi, and I am sorry that the ROC does nothing to stop this, nor does the Premier, nor the SQ: very ironic only the hard-working Working Standards Commission and the Human Rights Commission have taken action.

-- the following e-mails has been abridged [… when you see this…] to protect the person involved, or my contact within the Homeland Security Service of the U.S.A. since I did not trust the Provincial police (Sureté du Québec) at the time, and after their inaction and racial comments of April 2009 (telling me I should shut up because an Anglo is running the Caisse now…! Flagrant unprofessionalism, anyone?). I am now thoroughly convinced, it is for sure the Status Quo for minorities in QC, even if they are patriotic Canadians with families here for centuries, is to ignore them if they are not from the ethnic majority.

--the first message you see here is the final communication I sent to the Premier of the province too, since I figured he and the Finance Minister would be concerned. They were not, I guess, b/c I heard nothing from them, nor the SQ (either than the phone call with anti-Anglo mentioned above).

On behalf of the Premier of Québec, Mr. Jean Charest, thank you for your e-mail dated February 24, 2009 regarding the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec.

Rest assured that we have taken the content of your written communication into consideration very carefully. A copy has been forwarded to Mr. Jacques P. Dupuis, ministre de la Sécurité publique, and Ms. Monique Jérôme-Forget, ministre des Finances, for their perusal.

Sincerely yours,

Julie Mac Murray

Political Attaché

JMM/lb

cc: Mr. Jacques P. Dupuis, Minister

Ms. Monique Jérôme-Forget, Minister

[after the CDPQ disaster MJF resigned BTW, and said the letters used to clean out the board of directors were fake, although reported by La Presse clearly – Daniel Lessard know this and published]

__________________________________________________________

hugo@shebbeare.com 2009-02-24 00:12:38

> Dearest Prime Minister,

>

> Several years ago, before you took power we spoke briefly on the phone while I was praising the work of the CDECs to help entrepreneurs start up businesses in QC - Intellabase is now in its eight profitable year. Back then, I was asking you to support the CDECS over the phone during a radio call - in.

>

> Currently, I am in financial dire straights just like the rest of QC, but my cause is quite different than most, if you could give me a few moments to explain. I am a Vancouverite who moved over here after completing a degree in International Affairs and History during a four year stint in Brussels Belgium.

>

> From February to September in 2008, I was working at as a consultant at the Caisse de Depot - although forced into subordination and not allowed to use my own tools (hence politics causing me to be subject to double-imposition)[…]. If you think that place (CDP Capital building offices) is poorly run, then you've only seen the tip of the iceberg. Forget the fact that they've lost so much money this year (who cares what the exact number is[…$47BN now?]) - you should be concerned about the fact that the public interest not being served at all with respect to the management of the databases - especially the [details to come LATER!!!!]

Posted by Angryphone on 19 March 2010

It takes a lot of guts to do what you are doing Hugo. Since the 1970 the Quebec provincial civil service had less than 1% Anglos representation, 40 years later still less than 1% Anglos even though anglos make-up 10-15% of the Quebec population.

It's a very simple formula. Starve the anglos deny them access to private and public jobns and they will leave the province. The less Anglos voters the more "Yes" votes for the next referendum

Posted by didimiesen on 22 March 2010

dkalafat: I agree it takes a lot of courage to get the truth out about the 'ethnic cleansing' going ons in Quebec. What's tremendously alarming about what you say is: That Anglophones have been and are living in a perpetual STATE OF FEAR !! Imagine that - right here in Canada - you know the one that says it's the LAND OF THE FREE ! And one would think - our Federal Politicians would be ALL OVER Quebec for DARING to even CONSIDER such a grotesque - form of government in ANY Province in the country!

And yet - they not only HAVE ALLOWED IT - they have done everything they CAN to FREAKING ENCOURAGE IT!!

Then again, our Media and Anglos/Allos of Quebec & Canada could change this HORROR - in a minute - if they just got off their - do nothing asses - and made their outrage known to the politicians they elect. And if they asked everyone they know to make this PUBLIC. Sigh, and people wonder how 'Ethnic Cleansing' develops. Keep it up Hugo - the word IS getting out a lot faster than ever before.

The public has the right to know how bad things were run at the CDP, within the next two weeks we shall hear from the working standards commission about whether the CDP will allow them to investigate (by speaking to the witnesses). If they do not, I wish for you to be the first to publish the details about the internal audit failure at the GM, then and I shall attack openly, with my own name thanks to a (Uni. Prof) who will co-author with me on the OtherNewsPaper's editorial.

Do you wish to meet finally to discuss, or sit down for my next meeting with Amir?

Groupe Polygone will, with any luck, go down in Quebec legal history as one of the most brazen companies to darken the door of a courtroom.

But "Polygone" also seems destined to become the short name for a textbook law case in which the Quebec Court of Appeal vigorously and unambiguously upheld the public right to know.

The recipient of millions of dollars from the catastrophically mismanaged federal sponsorship program, Groupe Polygone went to court several months ago to protect its "privacy" from media coverage.

La Presse and the Globe and Mail made public details of Polygone’s negotiations with the federal government over how much sponsorship money it was prepared to return. The information was obtained from confidential government sources. Years back, secret source within government, known as "ma chouette," had supplied Globe and Mail reporter Daniel Leblanc with information about the sponsorship program, information that ultimately led to the Gomery commission.

In an astonishing decision in the La Presse case, Superior Court Judge Jean-François de Grandpré sided with Polygone, ruling that journalists could not use information provided by a source who had broken an oath of secrecy or promise of confidentiality.

This month, Quebec’s Court of Appeal quashed de Grandpré’s ruling, writing that forbidding the use of such sources amounted to seriously limiting if not crushing the media’s ability to gather information. (This fall, the Supreme Court will hear the Globe and Mail’s challenge to a gag order similar to La Presse’s, also by Judge de Grandpré.)

In a clear and forcefully worded judgment, the Court of Appeal ruled in the La Presse case that freedom of the press must be allowed under certain circumstances to prevail over other freedoms. The paramount right in those cases is the public’s right to be informed.

A ban on confidential sources, the court wrote, would have made impossible journalistic investigations such as Watergate or the Rainbow Warrior affair in which the French government carried out illegal operations against Greenpeace, or the sponsorship scandal here at home.

In a true democracy, the court said, freedom of the press is not limited to publishing the occasional government press release. As long as journalists themselves do not break any law to obtain information, they are free to make use of any information that comes their way.

No law in Canada forbids the publication of information which a journalist’s source may have gotten by breaking a confidence.

Groupe Polygone argued that all it was seeking in court was to prevent outside meddling. But the Court of Appeal recognized the request for a gag order : "Just because Groupe Polygone’s motion is titled ’Request for an order of non-interference ...’ that doesn’t mean it’s not a request for publication ban.")

The Court ruling set out in detail a stringent test for a gag order. Polygone’s claim that public outrage could derail its negotiations for a favourable settlement did not meet it.

Gag orders choke off the free flow of information in a democracy. They should be a last recourse in the courts. It’s time lower courts understood that.

Posted by Hugo Shebbeare on 24 March 2010

RE : I'm prepping up an editorial comment about the CDP for the OtherMajorNewsPaper with my prof buddy JoeBlow

Thu, August 27, 2009 1:03:35 AM

From: "Hugo Shebbeare, " < >

View Contact

To: kLastName@globeandmail.com

________________________________________

The data in MAJORDB is all the profit loss for each strategy and investment, it's value in changes per each currently, plus a whole strew of calculations (even Theta) - see the code attached for a process I cut down to two minutes from 27, the column list should give you a full idea of what type of data we are talking about.

[…abridged…]

The CNT's process is that they try mediation (which was agreed to and rolled back last minute [July 30th, 2009]), then they do an investigation - but the employer refused them access to contact the employees directly [refused the investigation], so it is then passed on directly to the lawyers to prepare for court...no date set yet, only heard this morning. [Commission des] Relations [des norms] du travail is the [public] court, and there is no appeal.

Yes, the data could have easily been modified and Loser1 (lazy, blocking, territorialist permanent DBA) wouldn't have even noticed ([…]...just to confirm the lack of monitoring) - the passwords into production were known by about 20-25 developers. I had asked only three who confirmed, but if that many know, you can be sure almost all the rest know too [qualified presumption]...it helps them in their job to see what's live in production, an unfair advantage into seeing live data that has too great a risk of mistake whether by accident or maliciously. No wonder they had convinced themselves that doing appropriate change and risk management documentation (with proof of testing) was overhead...they were described as 'Cowboys' by the IT department with reason [and later swept under IT dept’s control].

Hugo

________________________________________

From: "LastName, JournalistFirstName" <KLastName@globeandmail.com>

To: "Hugo Shebbeare, Intellabase" <hugo@ >

Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 1:08:38 PM

Subject: RE : RE : I'm prepping up an editorial comment about the CDP for the National Post with my prof buddy JoeBlow

Hugo: I am trying to get a handle on your email from yesterday, but I have many things going on at the moment.

What did you mean by your phone message this morning. Did the CNT reject your complaint? What do you mean by ``it's going to court``?

If I understand your explanation of internal controls, you are saying that access to the data bases was not as restricted as it should have been, making them subject to potential manipulation? And what data exactly are we talking about?

JournalistFirstName LastName

The Globe and Mail

Montréal

514.598.````

________________________________________

De: Hugo Shebbeare, Intellabase [mailto:hugo@]

Date: mer. 2009-08-26 13:05

À: LastName, JournalistFirstName

Cc: OtherDudeOnFailedAuditingProject

Objet : Re: RE : I'm prepping up an editorial comment about the CDP for the National Post with my prof buddy JoeBlow

The most important part of the internal audit failure that affects the public, I believe, is credibility - see the link about Segregation of Duties and Internal Contols.

If you can ensure that access is restricted, databases are fully logged, monitoring exists, and auditing CAN be done then you have credibility, however, internal controls were not in place for Plateformes analytiques, and I was trying to put them in place (see my doc sent yesterday [asked to be a Database Cop]) when they forced me out ([where they violated whistleblower laws C-25] the day after our meeting discussing the issues). It's all cover-up to make it look like it was somebody else's fault (Racist1 told everyone that c'est moi qui a peté une coche - if so, why we he the one yelling at me 'you don’t know what I was talking about', and 'this has gone on long enough')...typical scape-goating of the separatist élite [rampant at the CDPQ prior to Sabia], as well as silencing of the whistleblower [illegal – and thus criminal proceedings shall follow once the CRT is finished it’s work]. Truth always comes back to bite you in the end. ...maybe this is why […] only listened to […] minorities and treated them with respect, we wouldn't have lost so many billions.

Subject: RE : I'm prepping up an editorial comment about the CDP for the OtherMajorNews with my prof buddy JoeBlow

Hi Hugo,

Glad to hear your file is moving in what you feel is the right direction.

Before I can move ahead, and discuss this issue with my editors, I need you to write me a note to succinctly describe the internal audit failures at CDPQ and why they're important. This may sound frustrating and repetitive for you, but you have sent me a ton of information over the past six months and it is not easy to sort through it all.

I think you have highlighted some serious flaws at CDPQ and rumours of data base management failures/inadequacies have surfaced regularly. So, I do think you present some newsworthy and important criticisms.

Premier's office has snubbed chairs of two largest English school boards

By DON MACPHERSON, The GazetteApril 29, 2010 The day that the Supreme Court of Canada struck down Quebec's Bill 104 restricting admission to English schools, the chairs of the two English school boards most affected by the judgment wrote to Premier Jean Charest.

The English Montreal's Angela Mancini and the Lester B. Pearson's Marcus Tabachnick said it was "crucial" that they meet with the premier "soon," before the government introduced any new restrictions, to discuss their possible implications.

That was last October. As the chairs of the province's largest English school boards, Mancini and Tabachnick are arguably the leading elected representatives of the English-speaking community specifically.

And Charest seems to find time to meet with every minor foreign official who's passing through. Yet not only has the premier's office ignored their request, the boards say it hasn't even bothered to acknowledge receipt of their letter.

An unfortunate oversight? More likely it was a deliberate snub, considering the previous insults to the English-speaking community by Charest over the seven years that he has been premier.

These insults include the under-representation of anglophones in his cabinet, his cavalier dismissals of English-speaking ministers he has had, his avoidance of Quebec anglophone audiences, and his government's neglect of the particular concerns of the English-speaking community.

Maybe it's because Charest feels a need to compensate because he's a closet anglophone baptized John James who made the politically unwise choice of settling in Westmount when he arrived in provincial politics from Ottawa without authentic nationalist credentials.

But previous Liberal leaders who started out with reserves of nationalist credibility didn't show Charest's open disdain for his party's most loyal supporters.

In fact, anglos are so loyal that instead of being rewarded for it, they are punished. Charest knows that as long as the alternative to a Liberal government is one formed by the Parti Québécois, his party doesn't need to worry about losing non-francophone seats.

In a recent Léger Marketing-Le Devoir poll, a majority of non-francophones (56 per cent) expressed dissatisfaction with the Charest government. But 61 per cent of non-francophones said they would vote Liberal anyway.

Since Charest has snubbed them, the two Montreal English school boards are trying to gain community support in hopes of putting pressure on the government, or at least on English-speaking Liberal cabinet ministers and members of the National Assembly.

Their argument is that the vitality of the English-speaking community is threatened. But they have failed to get the support of the other English boards. And after more than a month, their online petition has received fewer than 11,000 signatures, the equivalent of less than one parent's signature for every four pupils in their schools.

The government seems more concerned about English-language opinion outside the province than inside, and avoiding a prolonged language controversy between French Quebec and English Canada that threatens national unity and benefits the PQ.

In response to the Supreme Court ruling, it's expected to rush legislation through the Assembly in the minimum required four weeks before the summer recess is scheduled to begin June 11.

And it's believed that the legislation will not require a "notwithstanding" clause overriding constitutional rights. If so, then the government has rejected a PQ proposal to restrict admission to unsubsidized English schools as well as subsidized ones.

Instead, it would allow a pupil to transfer to a subsidized English school after a number of years in a fully private elementary one - but only one of the latter that is well-established, such as Lower Canada College or the Study or most of the other 23 member institutions in the Quebec Association of Independent Schools.

Meanwhile, the chairs of the province's two largest English school boards will still be waiting for Charest to reply to their letter.